STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JOHN F. TORNESE(12-06-1334, 12-10-1546 AND 12-12-1137, ATLANTIC COUNTYAND STATEWIDE), A-4193-14T2

Defendant John F. Tornese, after civil/dispute litigation over pay-phone businesses with Marc/Mark Singer and John Corigliano, was indicted on witness tampering and multiple counts of terroristic threats arising from threatening phone calls and texts made Sept. 6, 2011 and Mar. 21, 2012.
Calls/texts threatened Singer, Corigliano, two of Singer’s attorneys (Indyg and Baldo), and an attorney’s employee; some recipients recognized Tornese’s stuttered voice and one call identified him.
Phone records traced prepaid numbers used to call Tornese’s mother and his attorneys on the same dates; some voicemails/texts were introduced at trial.
Jury convicted Tornese of second-degree witness tampering and several terroristic-threat/harassment counts; he was sentenced to three years for witness tampering (other counts merged or resulted in fines).
On appeal Tornese argued (1) prosecutorial misconduct in summation (improper comments about defense’s failure to obtain evidence and bolstering State witnesses) and (2) insufficiency/weight of the evidence on the tampering count (no evidence he’d been arrested or served with a complaint before Mar. 21, 2012).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor’s summation remarks deprived Tornese of a fair trial	Prosecutor’s rebuttal comments were responsive to defense attacks on witness credibility and investigative gaps; any improper remarks were cured by timely objection and strong curative jury instructions	Comments improperly shifted burden to defense (criticizing defense for not obtaining records), and improperly vouched for State lawyers and disparaged defense character witness	Court affirmed: remarks were responsive to defense summation; judge promptly gave strong curative instructions which jurors are presumed to follow, so no reversible misconduct
Whether the witness-tampering conviction was against weight/sufficiency of the evidence because no prior arrest/complaint before Mar. 21, 2012	State: ample circumstantial and direct evidence showed Tornese knew of a pending official proceeding (Singer had filed a citizen complaint in Sept. 2011) and the March threats referred to not testifying; phone records and voice ID supported guilt	Tornese: State failed to prove requisite belief that an official proceeding was pending (no proof of arrest/service before Mar. 21) and verdict was against the weight of evidence	Court affirmed: evidence (including Tornese’s admission of knowledge of Singer’s complaint, voice ID, and content of threats urging Singer not to "show up") supported the requisite belief and the conviction was not a miscarriage of justice

State v. Smith, 212 N.J. 365 (2012) (standards for evaluating prosecutorial summation and misconduct)
State v. Daniels, 182 N.J. 80 (2004) (prosecutor's special role and duty to avoid improper methods)
State v. Jackson, 211 N.J. 394 (2012) (evaluate fair import of summation in entirety)
State v. Wakefield, 190 N.J. 397 (2007) (contextual review of summation)
State v. Negron, 355 N.J. Super. 556 (App. Div. 2002) (requirement to evaluate performance in context of entire trial)
State v. D.A., 191 N.J. 158 (2007) (elements and required mental state for witness tampering; circumstantial proofs of belief that official action is pending)
State v. Frost, 158 N.J. 76 (1999) (misconduct reversal requires prejudice depriving fair trial)
State v. Carter, 91 N.J. 86 (1982) (standards for reviewing weight of the evidence)